Does the NYT Have an Obama-Shaped Hole in Their Heart?

[DeepModem Mom]

Media Bistro: Does the NYT Have an Obama Shaped Hole in Their Heart?



So this last week or so there seems to have been a bit of a rude awakening re Barack Obama over at the New York Times op-ed pages. First off, last Friday (July 4, no less) the editorial board wrote a piece titled "New and Not Improved" about how Obama's recent move to the middle was enormously distressing, especially considering all that change he's been promising (politicians promising change, crazy!). "We are not shocked when a candidate moves to the center for the general election. But Mr. Obama's shifts are striking because he was the candidate who proposed to change the face of politics, the man of passionate convictions who did not play old political games...We don't want any "redefining" on these big questions. This country needs change it can believe in." Snap!

Then on Saturday, Bob Herbert accused Obama of "lurching with abandon," of "not being the man "we had when we began," of "taking his base for granted." Did no one there read David Brooks very sharp "The Two Obamas" (yep, every once in a while he knocks one out of the park)? Better yet perhaps they should glance at MoDo's recent relationship advice column where she tells us that "infatuation trumps judgment," because when it comes to Obama the Times is sounding less like a newspaper contending with the reality and audacity of American politics and more like a disillusioned lover. As per usual, Gail Collins provides the sharpest insight:

"Think back. Why, exactly, did you prefer Obama over Hillary Clinton in the first place? Their policies were almost identical — except his health care proposal was more conservative. You liked Barack because you thought he could get us past the old brain-dead politics, right? He talked — and talked and talked — about how there were going to be no more red states and blue states, how he was going to bring Americans together, including Republicans and Democrats.

Exactly where did everybody think this gathering was going to take place? Left field?

When an extremely intelligent politician tells you over and over and over that he is tired of the take-no-prisoners politics of the last several decades, that he is going to get things done and build a 'new consensus,' he is trying to explain that he is all about compromise. Even if he says it in that great Baracky way."

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/newspapers/does_the_nyt_have_an_obama_shaped_hole_in_their_heart_89052.asp#more

[Eric J in MN]

1. "Why, exactly, did you prefer Obama over Hillary Clinton in the first place?"

One reason: I thought that Obama was less tied to corporate lobbyists than Hillary Clinton.

Obama's FISA vote which pleases the phone company lobbyists doesn't confirm that notion.

[babylonsister]

2. Everyone's trying to pigeonhole this man; it's interesting to watch

everyone try. I did enjoy Gail Collins' column yesterday. She made the most sense, and didn't let histrionics get in the way.

[Breeze54]

4. Is it "pigeonholing " or is it they're trying to identify with him?

:shrug:

I don't think that's such a bad thing.

That's what elections are all about.

"Getting to know you" and it works both ways.

[babylonsister]

6. I think many are trying to categorize him and that has nothing

to do with them wanting to identify with Obama. That would be a nice effort vs. villifying him, as that first column the OP mentioned was trying to do.
I'm glad he's not easily defined.

[depakid]

5. Claiming that backpeddling on NAFTA was "anti-dumb" was one of the most inane things I've read

this election cycle- particularly since the rust belt is key to this election....

:crazy:

I'm sure it pleased the senior editors at the Times, though.

[babylonsister]

9. "Anti-dumb"? Would that be smart, and why the code words?

Are we supposed to assume that's a clever use of language? Inane is right!

[depakid]

10. Her language, not mine!

"He was antidumb...

Dumb-avoidance would include... backtracking on the anti-Nafta pandering he did during the primary...."

[Breeze54]

3. "Why, exactly, did you prefer Obama over Hillary Clinton in the first place?"

As I recall, there were 8 Dems running for the presidency during the primaries.

Neither were my first choice.

[DeepModem Mom]

7. I think she's addressing those Obama supporters who have become so quickly disenchanted. nt

[blogslut]

8. I think there's mass transference when it comes to Obama

Because he is receptive, many people are willing to pin all their hopes and dreams on him. Naturally, this is a mistake.

I never saw him as a progressive. I have always known he was a moderate. I never assumed that his message of change was about changing America from moderate to progressive. I have always understood the message was about ending the gotcha, us-against-them, environment that has stifled our legislators for the last 28 years.

Of course, I would love to have a candidate that believes in everything that I believe. I would also love to have a world where there is no pain, no hunger, no war and no assholes. But those are wishes. They are not reality. Remember reality? Weren't we all once proud to be members of the reality-based world?

[DeepModem Mom]

11. I read another piece in which the writer said that people "projected their passions...

onto his candidacy." People are so in need of hope. But, unfortunately, he -- no one -- can be all things to all people.

The writer then says, "that they are newly disillusioned is not his fault, but theirs."

[blogslut]

12. Yep

I'm all for inspirational people but I stopped deifying humans a long time ago. I am a very cynical optimist. :hi:

[PM7nj]

13. He said it himself in his book.

Page 11 of The Audacity of Hope:

I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views. As such, I am bound to disappoint some, if not all, of them.

[DeepModem Mom]

16. What a perceptive, prescient, and very wise statement from Obama -- amazing! Thanks for posting. nt

[grantcart]

14. I read that Collins article was the most emailed column in NYT history

seems like it is a bit much

anyone else see that?

[blogslut]

15. I had to reread that title. I think it got changed.

It was the most emailed column in the last 48 hours.